Recommendations for Stereo Receiver or Integrated Amp?

[PearlcorderS701]

As we prepare to move into the new house, I have decided that instead of doing the HT in the upstairs loft, I will reserve this room for a dedicated 2-channel media space. With an Onkyo 605 to do the surround duties in the family room, I now need a two-channel stereo receiver or, preferably, an integrated amp.

I have been looking at the Onkyo digital integrated amp (the model escapes me) which they claim retails for about $800, plus their stereo receivers. I like the brand, but 800 bucks seems a bit excessive to me; I also checked out some integrateds and receivers from Yamaha and Denon, and also Marantz, and I can't decide which would offer better performance versus another. The other components in the 2-channel system would consist of (per my signature) a Marantz CC4001 5-disc CD changer, a TASCAM Professional CD recorder and a Technics turntable which I am going to replace.

Does anyone have any suggestions for good integrated amps or stereo receivers I should be looking at? Again, the budget isn't unlimited, so I'd like to stay in the sub-$1K range if possible. Should I be looking at NAD or higher-end brands like that?

 

[jostenmeat]

I like this unit. Tuner, with usable bass mgmt too. Free shipping through tomorrow. 5 yr transferable warranty, 30 day return policy. I like the retro looks too.

http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/rr2150.html

Some ideas, might have the Onkyo you were thinking of, but at a much lower budget in general, and that Cambridge is mistakenly put there for that price bracket.
http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=636165&postcount=2

 

[anamorphic96]

The 100 watt Onkyo TX-8555 is a tried and true design that they have been using for many years. It retails for less than 300.00 and will sound every bit as good as the higher priced NAD's and Marantz units. You could then take the saved money and spend a couple hundred on room treatments. I recently picked up 6 panels for my living room and they cost 200.00 dollars. Made a world of difference with my HT. See my thread in the room acoustics forum.

The HK 3490 would also be a great choice and can be readily found for less than 300 as well. It's another solid design that HK has been using for many years.

Both receivers are 4 ohm stable and will drive most speakers with ease.

As stated before in your other thread. Spend most of your money on room treatments and speakers. This is where the good sound is.

Good luck.

 

[Cristofori]

As we prepare to move into the new house, I have decided that instead of doing the HT in the upstairs loft, I will reserve this room for a dedicated 2-channel media space. With an Onkyo 605 to do the surround duties in the family room, I now need a two-channel stereo receiver or, preferably, an integrated amp.

I have been looking at the Onkyo digital integrated amp (the model escapes me) which they claim retails for about $800, plus their stereo receivers. I like the brand, but 800 bucks seems a bit excessive to me; I also checked out some integrateds and receivers from Yamaha and Denon, and also Marantz, and I can't decide which would offer better performance versus another. The other components in the 2-channel system would consist of (per my signature) a Marantz CC4001 5-disc CD changer, a TASCAM Professional CD recorder and a Technics turntable which I am going to replace.

Does anyone have any suggestions for good integrated amps or stereo receivers I should be looking at? Again, the budget isn't unlimited, so I'd like to stay in the sub-$1K range if possible. Should I be looking at NAD or higher-end brands like that?

Go for the Marantz receiver, you already said you have their disc changer, which is a plus. http://us.marantz.com/Products/2555.asp

The SR4023 is a solid 80 wpc, with a phono stage and pre-out/main-in inputs and a subwoofer output, plus a 3 year warranty. Everything that could be useful down the road for your purposes.

I don't see any good reason in getting their lesser integrated, which looks to be about the same build quality and is $50 less but only 40 wpc with no tuner or the above mentioned inputs.

If you can spring for an SA8003 integrated, by all means go for it. But I don't see why an integrated would necessarily be desired just for a 2nd system, might as well get the receiver.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

The 100 watt Onkyo TX-8555 is a tried and true design that they have been using for many years. It retails for less than 300.00 and will sound every bit as good as the higher priced NAD's and Marantz units.

Is this their stereo receiver or integrated amp?

Would it really sound every bit as good as the NADs and Marantzes?

You could then take the saved money and spend a couple hundred on room treatments. I recently picked up 6 panels for my living room and they cost 200.00 dollars. Made a world of difference with my HT. See my thread in the room acoustics forum.

The HK 3490 would also be a great choice and can be readily found for less than 300 as well. It's another solid design that HK has been using for many years.

Both receivers are 4 ohm stable and will drive most speakers with ease.

As stated before in your other thread. Spend most of your money on room treatments and speakers. This is where the good sound is.

Good luck.

I understand the temptation to continue returning to my problems related to the Master Audio debacle and such, but this is a bit of a different situation; I just want suggestions for an integrated amp or stereo receiver that will be used in a totally different room of the house for two-channel listening. Speakers for this room will be another issue, but I'll have to save for those as well.

While I understand that room treatments and speakers are important, I need to actually get a heart of the system first, which is an amp or receiver.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I like this unit. Tuner, with usable bass mgmt too. Free shipping through tomorrow. 5 yr transferable warranty, 30 day return policy. I like the retro looks too.

http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/rr2150.html

Some ideas, might have the Onkyo you were thinking of, but at a much lower budget in general, and that Cambridge is mistakenly put there for that price bracket.
http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=636165&postcount=2

Thanks so much for your assistance once again, 'josten. I thank you for all that research -- it's much appreciated sir.

I looked over those links and there are some good choices there; makes the decision harder! To answer your query regarding room size and power, this will be in a small loft room that isn't too spacious, so power isn't an issue at all. I'm sure a 50 watt per channel model will do here.

I saw that Onkyo receiver today in an RC Willey chain store and they had it on sale for like 200 bucks or so; I just think I'd rather stick with a nice integrated amp because I don't really need the tuner in this room. Just something that switches sources and will allow me to connect my CD recorder through the system loop so I can get vinyl and CD signals into it.

I like the Outlaw, and read about it in a review in a home theater oriented magazine when it was released; not sure about that silver "retro" look of it, though. I think I am leaning towards an Onk, because I happen to like their products and their design, plus I heard one of their stereo receivers in action when an old friend of mine had one in his system and it sounded like a good power amp, no kidding.

Onkyo's site lists their digital integrated model (one of them at least) at like $800 though; can I find this somewhere cheaper?

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Go for the Marantz receiver, you already said you have their disc changer, which is a plus. http://us.marantz.com/Products/2555.asp

The SR4023 is a solid 80 wpc, with a phono stage and pre-out/main-in inputs and a subwoofer output, plus a 3 year warranty. Everything that could be useful down the road for your purposes.

I don't see any good reason in getting their lesser integrated, which looks to be about the same build quality and is $50 less but only 40 wpc with no tuner or the above mentioned inputs.

If you can spring for an SA8003 integrated, by all means go for it.

Thanks for your opinion and input here, Cris; much appreciated as well.

Indeed, I have been considering the Marantzes because I used to really like their stuff; I always considered them the "affordable end of high end" and previously had a CC-67 changer and DR700 recorder in my rack before they both bit the dust. I replaced the CC-67 with a CC4001 (which has already been replaced by the company for an upgraded model with Marantz's new curved design) but it has been giving me many hiccups since buying it so I have been weary about buying Marantz again.

The thing is, with your recommendation on the stereo receiver, I don't really need the tuner in this room, as it will be used solely for serious two channel CD/vinyl listening and recording...given this, I was leaning towards an integrated. This Marantz looks nice though, and it's definitely something that's in my budget.

 

[Cristofori]

Would it really sound every bit as good as the NADs and Marantzes?

Too bad it's getting harder to just walk into a store and find out huh?

There is a dealer where I live that sells both those makes, but they focus mainly on Marantz' HT gear. I never got to hear the good stereo stuff. However, being a former NAD owner myself, I can attest that the stuff really isn't all that great.

I was embarrassed to find out one day that the C320BEE I was duped into buying from all the hype that it didn't even sound as good as my friends beat up late eighties Sony integrated amp when doing comparisons!

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Too bad it's getting harder to just walk into a store and find out huh?

You're not kidding...I feel like all I have left is Amazon and Crutchfield...

There is a dealer where I live that has both sells both those makes, but they focus mainly on Marantz' HT gear. I never got to hear the good stereo stuff. However, being a former NAD owner myself, I can attest that the stuff really isn't all that great.

I was embarrassed to find out one day that the C320BEE I was duped into buying from all the hype that it didn't even sound as good as my friends beat up late eighties Sony integrated amp when doing comparisons!

REALLY? Their stuff was that bad? I thought this was a pretty high end brand; I don't really like any of Sony's audio stuff, so to say that an old integrated from Sony sounded better than an NAD is something that concerns me...

Okay, perhaps I'll cross NAD off the list.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Just for everyone's reference, this is the Onkyo I have been eyeballing:

http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=A-9555&class=Amplifier&p=i

 

[PearlcorderS701]

The 100 watt Onkyo TX-8555 is a tried and true design that they have been using for many years. It retails for less than 300.00 and will sound every bit as good as the higher priced NAD's and Marantz units. You could then take the saved money and spend a couple hundred on room treatments. I recently picked up 6 panels for my living room and they cost 200.00 dollars. Made a world of difference with my HT. See my thread in the room acoustics forum.

The HK 3490 would also be a great choice and can be readily found for less than 300 as well. It's another solid design that HK has been using for many years.

Both receivers are 4 ohm stable and will drive most speakers with ease.

As stated before in your other thread. Spend most of your money on room treatments and speakers. This is where the good sound is.

Good luck.

...and this is the Onkyo you're talking about, right Anamorphic?

http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-8555&class=Receiver&p=i

 

[Cristofori]

Thanks for your opinion and input here, Cris; much appreciated as well.

Indeed, I have been considering the Marantzes because I used to really like their stuff; I always considered them the "affordable end of high end" and previously had a CC-67 changer and DR700 recorder in my rack before they both bit the dust. I replaced the CC-67 with a CC4001 (which has already been replaced by the company for an upgraded model with Marantz's new curved design) but it has been giving me many hiccups since buying it so I have been weary about buying Marantz again.

The thing is, with your recommendation on the stereo receiver, I don't really need the tuner in this room, as it will be used solely for serious two channel CD/vinyl listening and recording...given this, I was leaning towards an integrated. This Marantz looks nice though, and it's definitely something that's in my budget.

Although convenient, CD changers in general are not all that reliable, and most are not of the higher end variety. My old Sony SCD-CE595 SACD changer had mysteriously started to not play certain discs in certain slots after awhile. All I had to do was move the disc over in a different slot and it played fine! I recently bought a fresh new one because they are so cheap, and because I dropped the old one while drunk one day (whoops) and scuffed up the front and bent the chassis, although it still works. I'm just glad it wasn't a NICE component.

Nevertheless, I wouldn't judge Marantz on just a CD changer alone.

I recently ordered that Marantz receiver I told you about from Crutchfield in exchange for a Sony ES receiver of the same price that didn't have the features I thought it had. However, I have not received (pun intended) the receiver yet.

I can let you know how it all turns out if you haven't made up your mind yet.

Otherwise good luck!

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Although convenient, CD changers in general are not all that reliable, and most are not of the higher end variety. My old Sony SCD-CE595 SACD changer had mysteriously started to not play certain discs in certain slots after awhile. All I had to do was move the disc over in a different slot and it played fine! I recently bought a fresh new one because they are so cheap, and because I dropped the old one while drunk one day (whoops) and scuffed up the front and bent the chassis, although it still works. I'm just glad it wasn't a NICE component.

Nevertheless, I wouldn't judge Marantz on just a CD changer alone.

I recently ordered that Marantz receiver I told you about from Crutchfield in exchange for a Sony ES receiver of the same price that didn't have the features I thought it had. However, I have not received (pun intended) the receiver yet.

I can let you know how it all turns out if you haven't made up your mind yet.

Otherwise good luck!

I totally know where you're coming from with regard to the changers and their ultimate build quality; I agree that they're probably not of the same quality as the good single disc units, but I was hoping that this Marantz would be a bit better than what I'm experiencing -- the sound quality from its Cirrus Logic guts isn't the problem; the sound quality is quite rich even through my Onkyo TX-SR605 surround receiver played in Pro Logic II Music or Stereo mode, it's just that I have been having problems, since the day I got the changer from Crutchfield (ironically), with its memory feature. When I program the discs in the carousel for a certain order, so I can record custom mixed CDs into my TASCAM recorder, sometimes the Marantz completely ignores one of the disc trays and skips a programmed track, forcing me to cancel the recording process. It's annoying after awhile.

Yes, I would appreciate if you could keep me in the loop when you get your receiver so I know whether or not I'll consider a Marantz integrated or receiver. Thanks!

 

[Cristofori]

You're not kidding...I feel like all I have left is Amazon and Crutchfield...



REALLY? Their stuff was that bad? I thought this was a pretty high end brand; I don't really like any of Sony's audio stuff, so to say that an old integrated from Sony sounded better than an NAD is something that concerns me...

Okay, perhaps I'll cross NAD off the list.

I'm talking about the cheap NAD olive drab boxes and not the "Master Class" series. Although I believe they are now a greyish color.

And some of the Sony stuff that was made during that period up to the late 90's was actually quite good and underrated at the time.

Regardless, if my buddy can pick up an old Sony integrated for next to nothing that can still out class my $399 NAD 15 years on, I think it's time for me to look elsewhere for audio gear.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I'm talking about the cheap NAD olive drab boxes and not the "Master Class" series. Although I believe they are now a greyish color.

And some of the Sony stuff that was made during that period up to the late 90's was actually quite good and underrated at the time.

Regardless, if my buddy can pick up an old Sony integrated for next to nothing that can still out class my $399 NAD 15 years on, I think it's time for me to look elsewhere for audio gear.

What are the current differences in their modern line?

 

[Cristofori]

Yes, I would appreciate if you could keep me in the loop when you get your receiver so I know whether or not I'll consider a Marantz integrated or receiver. Thanks!

I'd expect the Marantz to be a very good, but not outstanding example of their audio gear. I also don't think a comparable Yamaha/Denon/Onkyo or whatever would be hardly any better, and they probably wouldn't have the 3 year warranty or the aluminum front of the Marantz, but I may be wrong.

They are all pretty much just Chinese black boxes. Pick the one with the best features, looks, warranty or system matching capability.

 

[Cristofori]

What are the current differences in their modern line?

I haven't been on their website in quite awhile, but I'd suspect not much difference really, except for the new greyish color and the new C320BEE or C325BEE whatever now has the Ipod/mp3 port.

There is the regular cheap NAD stuff, the goofy looking solo all in one unit stuff, and then there is the expensive "Master Class" line, which is an entirely different animal altogether.

 

[anamorphic96]

...and this is the Onkyo you're talking about, right Anamorphic?

http://www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-8555&class=Receiver&p=i

Yep thats the Onkyo I was referring to. Its quite good for the money.

The Marantz and NAD stuff would be good as well if you want to spend more. I respectfully disagree with Cristofori about NAD. Their amps are some of the best on the market and its what they are really good at. Any of their current integrated amps will sound fantastic. They will also cope with difficult speaker loads better than most. Do a search of the 320BEE or 325BEE or the current model and you will find them very well received.

The Marnatz units would also do quite well. The PM5003 was just reviewed by Stereophile and was well received.

If you go NAD talk to David at DMC electronics. He is one of the biggest online dealers for NAD and offers good discounts. Below what you see at the website. If you don't mind refurbished he offers those as well.

Here are is a link for the Marantz.
http://stereophile.com/integratedamps/marantz_pm5003_integrated_amplifier/#

Just google search the NAD integrated amps. Their is not huge difference between the models. The C325BEE could be had for pretty cheap right now as the C326BEE came out not to long ago.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Thanks everyone, for all your suggestions so far...I appreciate all of them. And thank you Anamorphic for providing that link for the Marantz; it looks tempting except for the claimed 40 watts X 2.

Here's the breakdown of the situation; I don't really want to get into the complexity of a stereo power amp and preamp combo (not that anyone suggested that but I'm just pointing it out), so that leaves me either a stereo receiver or integrated amp.

I would prefer an integrated amp because I don't really want or need to use a tuner for this application. I understand I can just "ignore" the tuner section of a receiver, but I feel an integrated would just be a bit more "serious" for this room.

Now, given these criteria, I could select:

-The Onkyo stereo receiver recommended by Anamorphic
-The Onkyo integrated digital amp I provided the link to (seems awfully expensive though)
-A Marantz stereo receiver
-A Marantz integrated amp
-A Yamaha integrated amp or stereo receiver
-The Outlaw integrated amp (or was it a receiver?)
-A Denon stereo receiver, maybe? (don't know how good these are)
-NAD amp or receiver

Or perhaps a handful of higher-end "boutque" brand models that anyone could suggest (Cambridge, PeachTree, etc.).

 

[PearlcorderS701]

they probably wouldn't have the aluminum front of the Marantz, but I may be wrong.

Onkyo components have a nice, thick aluminum faceplate.